Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Samuel Anthony Harwit

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:33, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Samuel Anthony Harwit

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication of notability. The lone secondary source provides next to no information about Harwit. All the others are his own blog, social media, plus one page where he talks about himself - none of those are independent, and they don't help establish notability nor improve an article whose content is blatantly promotional. Huon (talk) 23:46, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:03, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (✉) 00:05, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletwe - Non-notable and page verges on commercial use of Wikipedia.--Jim in Georgia Contribs Talk 00:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Instagram and the subject's own blog aren't exactly reliable and unbiased sources.PohranicniStraze (talk) 01:11, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.